Asia

Protest in Malaysia

It’s that time of year

THE Bersih rallies have quickly established themselves as something of a ritual in Malaysia's political calendar. The script goes something like this: thousands of protesters declare that they are going to march through Kuala Lumpur to demand electoral reform; a twitchy government and protest leaders spend days haggling over a suitable venue; the protest goes ahead in defiance of police demands; violence ensues, hundreds are arrested; government issues some apologies; everyone goes home. The only significant variant is the political impact. Last year it was huge—this year it will probably be very little.

Bersih means “clean” in Malay, and the Bersih movement is made up of a coalition of NGOs and civil-rights organisations that want the electoral system cleaned up so as to allow all parties a fair chance of winning elections. At the moment many claim that the electoral system is heavily rigged in favour of the ruling coalition, Barisan Nasional (BN), which has been in power continually ever since the country's independence from Britain began in 1957. The Bersih rallies have thus become inextricably linked to the cause of the opposition, led by Anwar Ibrahim.

The Bersih 3.0 rally on April 28th certainly attracted more people than last year's version, perhaps as many as 80,000 (although the police put the figure at about half of that). As there will almost certainly be a general election in the coming months, perhaps the high level of interest wasn't that surprising. But by comparison last year's rally, despite a relatively smaller number of protesters, achieved a terrific political impact.

At the time the government of Najib Razak badly mishandled the whole situation. Thousands of riot police were captured by video cameras and smart-phones laying into the unarmed protesters in order to disperse them; water cannon were fired into a hospital and more than 1,600 people were arrested. The use of state violence was a huge embarrassment to the government, confirming in many peoples' minds the impression that the prime minister was indeed a repressive ogre of Malay nationalism and not the reforming liberal that he had claimed.

Stung by widespread criticism in the international press, Mr Najib's government was forced to apologise for much of its behaviour. Subsequently it repealed a slew of outdated and repressive laws to win back its reforming credentials. A parliamentary committee was also set up to look into proposals for electoral reform. In all, a clear victory to Bersih.

This year it was more of a score-draw. Certainly, towards the end of the rally there was another eruption of violence, and the police were once again seen deploying water cannon and tear gas against the demonstrators. They arrested more than 400 of them. Once again there were reports of police brutality, and once again the prime minister had some quick explaining to do. This time Mr Najib felt obliged to apologise personally to a local reporter who had been beaten up by the police (he was one of several). Once again, these ugly scenes do little to bolster Mr Najib's claims to be a different kind of reform-minded leader.

However, this year there were problems on the Bersih side too. Some protesters attacked and overturned a police car and it seems that about 20 police officers were wounded. This, of course, played into the government's hands, allowing Mr Najib to claim that “The police were victims. They became targets and were beaten.” The leader of Bersih, Ambiga Sreenevasan, conceded that some people will think that “the rally had gone wrong” because of the unruly behaviour of a few protesters. The violence may even tarnish the broader movement for democratic reform, a bit. And Mr Anwar had some explaining of his own to do. He was caught on video near one of the police barricades talking to one of his colleagues; critics allege that he was inciting supporters to push aside the barriers. Mr Anwar himself says this is nonsense.

Either way, it is clear that Bersih won't be able to dominate the moral high ground—at least not on the score of one weekend's theatrics—as they did last year. The campaign for electoral reform goes on, but Mr Najib emerges from this year's fracas with his reformist credentials essentially intact, not much worse for the wear.

Congratulations to the Economist for writing an unbiased and accurate report on thev Bersih violent demonstration. However, to say that the demonstration has little impact on Malaysians is not true. Infact, for the vast majority of Malaysians who believe in democracy and prefer peaceful life, the demonstration reinforced their believe that Bersih organizers and the opposition parties are undemocratic and cannot be trusted.

It is rich for Anwar to say that the aim of the demonstration is for a clean election, when the election of his own party was riddled with irregularities,that a contender forvthe deputy president had to quit the party, claiming frauds and rigging in the election process.. DAP banned Utusan Malaysia, a pro government newspaper from all Penang state functions. Nik Aziz, a leader in the opposition party, said immediately after the demonstration that it is alright to topple a government through street demonstrations, which according to him a modern way of installing a government. The organizers are anything, but Bersih (clean).

Yes, the impact is great. The image of the organizers and the opposition parties are completely tarnished in the eyes of most Malaysians.

I shall fix your comment here. The car was drove slowly on the road while the activist smashing and trowing things to the car. One of the thing was rock and it hit the head of the driver, causing him to feint. That is why the car drove into the crowd. No, no one die in that incident I believe. The injured person was the police, a reporter who trying to help the police (because he saw what really happened), and a few activist. They didn't overturn the car immediately because there was no one under, the overturn was done a few minutes later after the police got heavily beaten. You can check videos on youtube to understand things better.

So what if there were 200000 people at the rally? Do you really think all those people really feel the elections are rigged? No, they were just opposition supporters. The number of people in the rally does not show that Malaysians are not satisfied with the electoral process. It just there are at least 200000 opposition supporters. Big deal. Consider how many Malaysians were condemning the whole circus.

Malaysia is still a very safe country to live in. There was a case of kid-napping of a young child on the eve of the rally and he was brought back home safely a few days later. Happy to see that the police have yesterday (just a few days later) caught 4 suspects. The Royal Malaysian Police Force are a group of dedicated people and is often misunderstood.

Let's all be reminded that there were, at the rally including the mini-rallies in the individual states, at most 100,000 people. We have a total of 32 million people in Malaysian and the ones who attended the rally are at most 0.03% of total population of Malaysia. So, we can say that there are 99.97% people in Malaysia who do not condone rallies like this.

I think you better check if your journalist was playing hookey. Was he even there? The impact Bersih 3.0 had this year is far greater than last year's. Either he wasn't there or he did not really do a good job in grasping the response of the people, before, during and after.

He must be only talking to people who re-regurgitate what the government want you to hear.

In 1998 anwar almost cause the economy of Malaysia to shrink.From his student days he has been demonstrating when he is not in power.And now he is doing all the manouvering through his influenced channels the demo way to power.
Is it sensible to say the present goverment is unfair in elections when they lost 4 states to opposition.
The idea is anwar wanted to press the goverment to do things under pressure till the goverment in power become disadvantage.
Bersih is an idea to create something from nothing and he is good at it.
But all the PR manifesto's are build on eternal jealousy,bullshit and smart alec who has not shown their declared genius talent to significantly turnaround the states they are ruling.

Well said! It's that "Time of the Year" again. Many who attended expressly said that it was like a carnival to them. So, it is does seem like a circus of opposition supporters doing their "annual performance". Despite their motives, the fact stands that nothing good can come out of rallying like that even if it was a "peaceful" one. The organizers failed to control their minions and as a result, violence ensued. Then the organizers held press conference to wash their hands clean from the actions of those whom they failed to control stating that they never intended the rally to be violent. It is hilarious when you look at how the Organizers of this Rally behave when things went hay-wire. It was as if it had nothing to do with them. You make the bed, you must lie on it! No matter what, no matter how "noble" your intentions are, "Rallying" is not the way to go about advancing those intentions. These activities shake the stability of the country and is cancer to a strong economy. I hope those who intend to join any further rallies (other than the die-hard opposition supporters or the paid extras) do consider thoroughly whether this is the kind of future you want for your children. Please be reminded that if this continues, your children will one day be very afraid to even leave their house. Is this a future you envisage? Street demonstrations are in the past for countries like Malaysia. Seriously, are we going backwards?

I too, am very disappointed in this article. The headline itself, 'It's that time of year' diminishes what is in effect, a turning point in Malaysian politics. To describe it as an annual ritual without much political impact degrades what actually happened in the hearts and minds of many thousands of Malaysians. For the first time in Malaysian history we have so many old people, young people of the different races rallying together in support of Bersih and the crowd was estimated to be 250,000 by the rally organizers.

Even if the estimate is wrong and half of those numbers went in support, that would still be in excess of 100,000 people. The blogs and social media portals have been full of first hand accounts of how people, especially old people had shrugged off their decades of fear of authority and apathy to join in this rally. This is no mean feat as we in Malaysia have usually been fearful of joining such protests.

I wonder in writing your article, if you have been there yourself, witnessing the impact. I do not see any interviews that you've had had with Malaysians who were there. Your political analysis appears to be pieced together from news and blog accounts and youtube videos. Your analysis should perhaps be from a cultural and historical perspective as well, because to understand the politics of a country, one needs to see it from its origins: its history and culture.

I believe Malaysians are still exploring this burst of political awareness and nationalism and the political impact of this Bersih 3.0 rally has yet to be ascertained. To downgrade its impact to just another 'ritual in the political calendar of Malaysia' is to nullify all the effort and support of the thousands of Malaysians who marched on April 28. Your article is shallow and cynical and does an injustice to what happened on April 28.

I too must add my disappointment at Banyan's lack of research into this topic. Perhaps I can shed some light:
1. If you pay close attention to the BBC coverage that was censored in Malaysia (which the BBC is demanding an explanation for now), the bits that were cut off were only two interviews with BERSIH supporters at the rally, AND the correspondent saying that the fracas started AFTER Ambiga declared BERSIH a success (upon gathering in front of the Merdeka square, the initial destination of BERSIH before they changed the destination in respect of a Court Order) and the crowd began to disperse. Perhaps this was not the turn of events some parties were hoping for? This might have led to no.2:
2. There are some pictures up that show the corner of the barrier that was dismantled was not protected, and the persons dismantling it did it slowly and methodically.
3. The police seemed to have been waiting for the dismantling to occur - because they reacted instantly, launching two trucks and tear-gassing everyone all the way down four main roads. In fact, protestors who had reached the barrier found that the way back was tear-gassed as well, even though the police would have been ahead of them all this while.
4. There are several eyewitness accounts of BERSIH T-shirt clad 'protestors' suddenly making arrests - these were the same people who had provoked the crowd earlier to 'attack' the police.
5. An UMNO Division Head from Pahang identified several of his police friends in the BERSIH crowd, all wearing the BERSIH yellow T-Shirt and all had on a yellow band. They disappeared later, once the tear-gas was launched and he saw another wearing a police uniform much later.
6. There are several eyewitness accounts to brutal beatings, even of senior citizens, that were in most cases not provoked. The journalists who dared record these events themselves got beaten or had their cameras stolen/destroyed. Harry Fawcett from Al-Jazeera was one of these.
The assertions I make above are not backed by any unshakeable evidence, but they are the best thing we have to trying to piece together what happened on that day. Nevertheless, as they are mostly the recollections of individuals, they must be taken with a pinch of salt. That being said, the whole thing smells very fishy indeed..

For the author and those outside, the cynicism is understandable. Perhaps you should be there before you write your piece. Let me say a few things:
1. There is a huge groundswell of unhappiness, easily more than 100,000 people – the silent majority is no longer so silent. The fact of such a multi-racial crowd suggest that the concern cuts across the whole spectrum of the society. The chinese are usually not known for their political consciousness and tended to avoid trouble. But the huge chinese presence is telling. The people are no longer afraid to speak up. If there is a free and fair election, I think the Govt will lose. But will there be one? The huge turnout is proof that the great majority of Malaysian middle class no longer believe. Have we achieved anything? I believe, yes. It cannot be a stronger statement to the govt. If the Govt doesn’t recognise this, then they are either very blind or very authoritarian and arrogant.
2. The police definitely over-compensated, to put it mildly. They were punitive in their approach. There were many examples, videos showing police behaving unprofessionally, even being brutal in their treatment of the unarmed protesters. The author seemed taken in too by the 'offfical media version' of crowd violence. Subsequent postings showed the real story. The fact is that these retaliation were due to extreme provocation and in the case of the overturned police car, prompted by fear that there was someone trapped underneath it.
3. The unhappiness is now translating to anger. There is certainly more anger this time round than Bersih 2.0. People are more defiant. The anger is real. No one in their right, rational mind would retaliate against the police given that they were unarmed and unprotected. If the Govt does not recognise this anger, it may well boil over to a full scale reaction if people become desperate enough.
Will Bersih 3.0 achieve anything lasting or it's just an annual nuisance factor? Time will tell. But I am darn proud to be there and be counted amongst the rally-goers.

In the larger picture of things what we are observing in Malaysian politics today is 'a battle for the perception space.' The media component of this space is very important. BERSIH is only one of the many events occupying this space, relevant perhaps to urban, often arrogant and condescending middle class Malaysians. It is obvious a street demonstration on any issue is fodder for media and an easy access to this space. As an incumbent Najib has many avenues to occupy this space and lots of funds and methods at his disposal. Anwar has very few and has taken with great relish the washing of Malaysia's dirty linen publicly at the international sphere, the toxic versions flows back to Malaysia through social media. Anwar needs foreign support which many suggest he has received generously. This ding-dong battle for 'the perception space' between these two Malaysian political gladiators will continue, as long as Anwar's ambition is not fulfilled, to be the Prime Minister. For Najib it is about continuity and change. For Anwar is about 'regime change'. But it is more than that. Its not for easy for Anwar to cope with the trauma of having to prove his 'moral competency and credibility'. It is about honour and integrity as a internationally-proclaimed moderate Muslim leader. So, its not just becoming a prime minister that motivates him, more than that, to BERSIH or clear his name and family. This motivation has blurred his ability to see things in a long-term and in a clear manner. He has never been able to establish a 'shadow cabinet' until today. He can't promise the people that as a leader of the 'new government' he will decide on the day after the election who is going to be his cabinet members. That sounds like a government that exists in some island on Gullivers' journey. Foreign and local correspondents have conveniently forget to ask this question. The visual effect of blood, violence and street protest is more 'serious' and important for news purposes than that of why a shadow cabinet isn't there. Let's see what the arrogant and condescending middle class has to say about this: being duped and lost in their grievances and idealism!

I am very disappointed at the quality of this article. Hundreds of photographs and eyewitness accounts indicate that the number at the rally is much closer to 150,000-250,000. Many incidents, including the overturned police car, have been taken out of context. The police car was overturned because witnesses suspected there were people trapped under the car. The Economist failed to do justice to the level of police brutality perpetrated. The police fired tear gas at, unleashed chemical water on, chased, beat down, and arrested people who were already dispersing. An Australian senator in the crowd was tear-gassed. Journalists (both local and international) were attacked; their cameras were smashed and their memory cards confiscated. The Economist clearly did not have any journalists in KL that Saturday, and this is a botched and pathetic third-hand account. The local media is clearly biased, and even censored the BBC report. Please refer to independent online news for more accurate accounts - Malaysiakini, Malaysian Insider, Malaysian Digest, Free Malaysia Today.

What is more "phatatic" is how a brainwashed person can be blinded just for the sake of defending BN. Hello, people went to the rally armed with salt and water. How do you topple a government with salt and water? Stop parroting Mahathir! Mahathir also asked us to give Najib more support so that the ISA can be resurrected. Are you going to echo that sentiment too?

Yes, the way to "topple" a government is through the ballot box. However, if the election process is not perceived to be fair and free, there is no guarantee that the government is truly "of the people, by the people, for the people."

And what on earth does "the view of a person who is exasperated to win the GE" even mean?

I as a Malaysian who supports Bersih, applauds The Economist on keeping its neutrality. However it should be noted that the police car was overturn because the police drove into the crowd of people killin 1 and injuring 3. The actions taken by demonstrators were to ensure no one was trapped beneath the car.

I agree with u Student me, as compares to the Malaysia population what is a mere '200000'and, its the opposition who are teaching the children bad things that is to go against the law, and my god there are sibbling being carried on their parents shoulders during the demo, is this the way they are educating their children by teaching them to do illegal and to demonstrate against the law of the country, a law passed by parliament. The police have the excuse being there because they have a duty to uphold the law, what about the demonstrators what excuse do they have to do street demonstration or are they there to propogate anarchy. My foot and i am amaze that they can claim their children are afraid to come out because the police are busy beating the people, when in actual fact they are the prepatrator for the people to go against the law. Actually I am sick of the tantaram of the opposition who not only create unrest in the country, but are also proud to announce to the world that the govt and the police has resorted to abuse of power, when in actual fact the demonstrators were purposely instigation the police to react, by throwing bottles and stones towards them. The final straw was the leaders of the demonstrator instigated the crowd to ram the police barricade and take over the Dataran. The vedio shots clearly indicate this, and I am not suprise if the opposition and their supporters can come up and say that the vedios are fake. Any fool can see that these vedios are for real..I think they just can't accept reality and that their objective were not achieved..

This year we're back to downplaying the overall importance of the protests. As mentioned in a number of comments this post takes a view that the Economist's ex-intern Khairy Jamaluddin (now head of the ruling party's youth wing) would be proud of: the government comes out looking fine. On the streets of Malaysia things are looking decidedly less favourable for the governement. Judging by the chatter online, even relatively placid, non-political people are appalled; plus with large turnout most people know at least someone who was sprayed with teargas by an unprovoked police corps.

At the moment it's a question of those with an internet connection versus those still spoon-fed by the government propaganda machine. Sadly for the government: the internet is spreading and the truth will be harder to manipulate. I expect Bersih movement will have a wider impact on Malaysian politics than this post assumes.

I like the Economist; but I can't help think that it's stance on Malaysia is lazy and uninformed.

BERSIH claim the moral high ground as it's a lot easier than having to actually do the real work of building a consensus and getting involved on a day-to-day basis to see through implementation. The moral high ground also helps support the apolitical positioning claimed by S. Ambiga and her devotees.

Middle-class lalas buying into vague rhetoric become fodder for the political sponsors of BERSIH.